为什么经济学是唯一一门有如此多曲线上升和下降的学科?有一种替代方法

IF 4 3区 管理学 Q2 BUSINESS Eurasian Business Review Pub Date : 2024-02-29 DOI:10.1007/s40821-024-00253-y
Giovanni Dosi
{"title":"为什么经济学是唯一一门有如此多曲线上升和下降的学科?有一种替代方法","authors":"Giovanni Dosi","doi":"10.1007/s40821-024-00253-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Even the most rudimentary training from Economics 101 starts with demand curves going down and supply curves going up. They are so ‘natural’ that they sound even more obvious than the Euclidian postulates in mathematics. But are they? What do they actually mean? Start with “demand curves”. Are they <i>hypothetical ‘psychological constructs’</i> on individual preferences? Propositions on <i>aggregation</i> over them? Reduced forms of actual <i>dynamic</i> proposition of time profiles of prices and demanded quantities? Similar considerations apply to “supply curves” The point here, drawing upon the chapter by Kirman and Dosi, in Dosi (Dosi, Foundations of Complex Evolving Economies Innovation, Organization and Industrial Dynamics, Oxford University Press, 2023), is that the forest of demand and supply curves is basically there to populate the analysis with <i>double axiomatic notions of equilibria</i>, both ‘in the head’ of individual agents, and in environments in which they operate. Supply and demand “curves”, I am arguing, are one of the three major methodological stumbling blocks on the way of progress in economics, the other related ones being ‘utility functions’ and ‘production functions’. There is an alternative: represent markets and industries <i>how they actually works</i>, and model them both via fully fledged Agent Based Models and via lower dimensional dynamical systems.</p>","PeriodicalId":51741,"journal":{"name":"Eurasian Business Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Why is economics the only discipline with so many curves going up and down? There is an alternative\",\"authors\":\"Giovanni Dosi\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40821-024-00253-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Even the most rudimentary training from Economics 101 starts with demand curves going down and supply curves going up. They are so ‘natural’ that they sound even more obvious than the Euclidian postulates in mathematics. But are they? What do they actually mean? Start with “demand curves”. Are they <i>hypothetical ‘psychological constructs’</i> on individual preferences? Propositions on <i>aggregation</i> over them? Reduced forms of actual <i>dynamic</i> proposition of time profiles of prices and demanded quantities? Similar considerations apply to “supply curves” The point here, drawing upon the chapter by Kirman and Dosi, in Dosi (Dosi, Foundations of Complex Evolving Economies Innovation, Organization and Industrial Dynamics, Oxford University Press, 2023), is that the forest of demand and supply curves is basically there to populate the analysis with <i>double axiomatic notions of equilibria</i>, both ‘in the head’ of individual agents, and in environments in which they operate. Supply and demand “curves”, I am arguing, are one of the three major methodological stumbling blocks on the way of progress in economics, the other related ones being ‘utility functions’ and ‘production functions’. There is an alternative: represent markets and industries <i>how they actually works</i>, and model them both via fully fledged Agent Based Models and via lower dimensional dynamical systems.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51741,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Eurasian Business Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Eurasian Business Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40821-024-00253-y\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Eurasian Business Review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40821-024-00253-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

即使是最基本的《经济学 101》培训,也是从需求曲线下降和供给曲线上升开始的。它们如此 "自然",听起来甚至比数学中的欧几里得公设还要明显。但真的是这样吗?它们究竟意味着什么?从 "需求曲线 "开始。它们是关于个人偏好的假设性 "心理建构 "吗?对它们进行汇总的命题?价格和需求量的时间曲线的实际动态命题的还原形式?类似的考虑也适用于 "供给曲线"。在此,我们借鉴多西(多西,《复杂演化经济的基础--创新、组织和产业动力学》,牛津大学出版社,2023 年)所著的基尔曼和多西的章节,指出需求和供给曲线之林的存在,基本上是为了在分析中充实均衡的双重公理概念,既包括个体行为主体 "头脑中 "的均衡,也包括个体行为主体所处环境中的均衡。我认为,供求 "曲线 "是经济学进步道路上的三大方法论绊脚石之一,其他相关的绊脚石是 "效用函数 "和 "生产函数"。我们有另一种选择:用市场和产业的实际运作方式来表现它们,并通过成熟的代理模型和低维动态系统来模拟它们。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Why is economics the only discipline with so many curves going up and down? There is an alternative

Even the most rudimentary training from Economics 101 starts with demand curves going down and supply curves going up. They are so ‘natural’ that they sound even more obvious than the Euclidian postulates in mathematics. But are they? What do they actually mean? Start with “demand curves”. Are they hypothetical ‘psychological constructs’ on individual preferences? Propositions on aggregation over them? Reduced forms of actual dynamic proposition of time profiles of prices and demanded quantities? Similar considerations apply to “supply curves” The point here, drawing upon the chapter by Kirman and Dosi, in Dosi (Dosi, Foundations of Complex Evolving Economies Innovation, Organization and Industrial Dynamics, Oxford University Press, 2023), is that the forest of demand and supply curves is basically there to populate the analysis with double axiomatic notions of equilibria, both ‘in the head’ of individual agents, and in environments in which they operate. Supply and demand “curves”, I am arguing, are one of the three major methodological stumbling blocks on the way of progress in economics, the other related ones being ‘utility functions’ and ‘production functions’. There is an alternative: represent markets and industries how they actually works, and model them both via fully fledged Agent Based Models and via lower dimensional dynamical systems.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
11.40%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: The Eurasian Business Review (EABR) publishes articles in Industrial Organization, Innovation and Management Science. In particular, EABR is committed to publishing empirical articles which provide significant contributions in the fields of the economics and management of innovation, industrial and business economics, corporate governance and corporate finance, entrepreneurship and organizational change, strategic management, accounting, marketing, human resources management, and information systems. While the main focus of EABR is on Europe and Asia, papers in the fields listed above on any region or country are highly encouraged. The Eurasian Business Review is one of the two official journals of the Eurasia Business and Economics Society (EBES) and is published quarterly.
期刊最新文献
Exploring the innovative effort: duration models and heterogeneity The Influence of value chain governance on innovation performance: A study of Italian suppliers ESG unpacked: Environmental, social, and governance pillars and the stock price reaction to the invasion of Ukraine Does organizational innovation facilitate product innovation? Evidence from Korean Manufacturing Firms So far, yet so close. Using networks of words to measure proximity and spillovers between firms
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1